you put it off, as i understand it, but whether or not you alter it in a way that protects bases in germany and unneeded nuclear weapons and prolongation of the war in afghanistan, and instead make more cuts elsewhere. >> you know what the republicans, particularly conservative republicans, are arguing, and a couple of them rand paul, pat toomey, put out statements after these negotiations shut down tonight and basically said, look, here's what democrats want. democrats want essentially to take more money from the wealthy, from the top few percent, to pay for more government spending that doesn't help us with the deficit. and you hear members of congress, your republican colleagues who say, in my district, they don't want more spending. and that's how they see this money being spent. >> two things i would say. first of all, that is not the democratic position. no one that i know of is arguing that all of the increased revenue should go for increased spending nap simply isn't the case. by the way not having the sequester doesn't mean increased spending. it mean not having spending cuts. i vo